> egalitarianize). In either case, tell it like it is. Conscious> political goals are being thrust on a language by a minority of the> users of the language in an attempt to effect a change on the culture. This> seems to be quite different from the normal changes a language goes thru as the> majority of users adopt changes to reflect a changing culture.>

now this i interesting indeed, thomas. conscious political golas being
thrust etc....what is striking is the codicil to your comment, which
suggests that somehow the language being thrust upon is, in its pristine
state of normal change, apolitical....while accepting the proposition
that attempts to change usage are politically motivated [ with the aim, i
would suggest not on thursting change on some magical majority, but
rather of effecting some sort of consciousness raising] is it not either
disingenuous or at least misleading to suggest that 'normal usage, normal
change etc' are not also, perhaps 'unconsciously' political as well...

and this is not name calling,..i am genuinely curious how one form of
change is political thursting while the other is apolitical normalcy??

nothing, i think, is ever apolitical, however common or conventional

dougl st.c. whose sig file just vanished from the screen for reasons he
does not want to investigate